Setting Some Standards

You should not expect people to have to follow the standards for how you do things. But enough of that. If something becomes too big a problem and people complain... well you get the idea. If the coloured posts were not a problem as you say then no-one would have complained about it, simple as that.

Fair enough, but a similar rule should be enforced about doom text as spam. Do it occasionally, then fine. Do it too often, get a casual hint to stop doing it. Don't pay heed, get pwn3d. Rather than percentages, such a rule should be called in.

I also suggest that Garde clarify from SW the real purpose of the SL (it wasn't clear whether the SL is a generic happy-chat forum or something where you're still expected to post decent lengths and talk in-depth).

 

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Look closely at my definition of spam. Spam does not follow nor contribute to the flow of conversation nor the original topic. SP added one-liners to this definition. Offtopic is allowed as long as it follows the flow of conversation (i.e. must be related to the current conversation).

I don't think that ALL one-liners can be considered spam. What if one liners actually DO contribute to the thread? Like...

"Hey... did you mean THIS instead of THAT?"

Such a one-line comment could change the whole topic of a thread. If the person who made the thread's heading post did not realise it, the topic would be totally off-topic from the beginning if not for that simple, one-liner.

Well I know this sounds extreme but... =/

SIZE 4 IS STILL FAIRLY LARGE

Did you click the post link I included in my post? D:

Fair enough, but a similar rule should be enforced about doom text as spam. Do it occasionally, then fine. Do it too often, get a casual hint to stop doing it. Don't pay heed, get pwn3d. Rather than percentages, such a rule should be called in.

But....

Ok let's just say that occasionally = like... 3 to 4 times in 10 posts.

Now if those 3 - 4 posts were COMPLETELY written in doom text. How'd you like it? >_>

I'm not trying to insult your idea. However, I do feel that it's just missing something. Maybe the % limit AND this suggestion can be combined to make it more effective?

I also suggest that Garde clarify from SW the real purpose of the SL (it wasn't clear whether the SL is a generic happy-chat forum or something where you're still expected to post decent lengths and talk in-depth).

Well I know is that posts DO NOT COUNT in the SL.

However, I also do know that having many posts takes up bandwidth (correct me if I'm wrong plz).

So... Maybe the SL isn't such a good idea? Because if each and every post takes up bandwidth and if people are bothered by it, what's the use of the SL, a place where people can talk freely and state their opinions on just about anything (in my opinion)? I mean I've never heard of anyone saying that the SL is only for Cave Story, Zelda etc. game discussion. =/

And if it weren't for free and easy speech, why don't posts count in this forum section?

I'm not actually taking a stand here. I just find it kinda weird. I still DO want a place where people can talk freely, but I find it impossible due to the issue on bandwidth.

Edit -

I mean, someone could say "Hey people I made this artwork, do check it out ^__^ [insert pic here]". Does that count as a one-liner? Or a post that is made to appreciate/criticise a certain work where not more than one line is required to get the message across (within constructive appreciation/criticism) Like: "this mod is awesome, I especially find the music amazing. :O"; Or: "Hmmm... I didn't enjoy this thing, the difficulty is nowhere near as challenging as is expected of a Cave Story mod, sorry".

About the picture thing, I don't think you can consider that post a one-liner due to the fact that the picture is larger than any one-liner can ever be. The picture ITSELF is what contributes to the forum, unless otherwise (lol). So I think that those kinds of posts cannot be considered one-liners.


About the criticism, I feel that that also shouldn't be considered spam. However, it does qualify to be a one-liner as it only has one line. xD

This makes me doubt that one-liners can be included in the "spam" category. Like I said, one-liners can be helpful sometimes

Edity -

http://www.cavestory.org/forums/threads/870/

Look at this.

Now.. What if the spam post was made in a thread that people have already posted in? What do we do? Close the thread? >_>

 

But....

Ok let's just say that occasionally = like... 3 to 4 times in 10 posts.

Now if those 3 - 4 posts were COMPLETELY written in doom text. How'd you like it? >_>

I'm not trying to insult your idea. However, I do feel that it's just missing something. Maybe the % limit AND this suggestion can be combined to make it more effective?

But won't completely blacked out posts count as spam?

It's all according to the context of the post, a post which has 60%+ of doom is most likely a spam post, and we already have a rule about spam. I meant we don't need a seperate rule for doom text because sometimes such posts do contribute to the topic, and if they don't, they're spam. Simple as that.

Well I know is that posts DO NOT COUNT in the SL.

However, I also do know that having many posts takes up bandwidth (correct me if I'm wrong plz).

So... Maybe the SL isn't such a good idea? Because if each and every post takes up bandwidth and if people are bothered by it, what's the use of the SL, a place where people can talk freely and state their opinions on just about anything (in my opinion)? I mean I've never heard of anyone saying that the SL is only for Cave Story, Zelda etc. game discussion. =/

And if it weren't for free and easy speech, why don't posts count in this forum section?

I'm not actually taking a stand here. I just find it kinda weird. I still DO want a place where people can talk freely, but I find it impossible due to the issue on bandwidth.

You have a point. But don't 3-4 lines of post take more bandwith than a one-liner?

Edity -

http://www.cavestory.org/forums/threads/870/

Look at this.

Now.. What if the spam post was made in a thread that people have already posted in? What do we do? Close the thread? >_>

Delete the post, ban the bot. What else?

 

But won't completely backed out posts count as spam?

It's all according to the context of the post, a post which has 60%+ of doom is most likely a spam post, and we already have a rule about spam. I meant we don't need a seperate rule for doom text because sometimes such posts do contribute to the topic, and if they don't, they're spam. Simple as that.

!!!

I think we seriously need to draw a line between spam and doom text. How does doom text relate to spam? O_O I don't see any link at all ><

I mean, people can make an extremely helpful ENTIRE post out of doom text. That contradicts what spam is defined as. It's helpful, for one, but it is doom text. So... ?_? *big confusion*

You have a point. But don't 3-4 lines of post take more bandwith than a one-liner?

I have no idea how bandwidth is used up in forums. I thought that the more posts, the more bandwidth used rather than the more characters in a post, the more bandwidth used.

Delete the post, ban the bot. What else?

Rofl.

But then if that were so simple, For the threads started by spam bots, why can't we just delete those threads and ban the bots? >_> Was it because there was no admin free enough to do so in the past and now there is? =/

Well should we post in those threads or shold we avoid posting in infected threads till the spambot message is removed? O_o

 

!!!

I think we seriously need to draw a line between spam and doom text. How does doom text relate to spam? O_O I don't see any link at all ><

I mean, people can make an extremely helpful ENTIRE post out of doom text. That contradicts what spam is defined as. It's helpful, for one, but it is doom text. So... ?_? *big confusion*



I have no idea how bandwidth is used up in forums. I thought that the more posts, the more bandwidth used rather than the more characters in a post, the more bandwidth used.



Rofl.

But then if that were so simple, For the threads started by spam bots, why can't we just delete those threads and ban the bots? >_> Was it because there was no admin free enough to do so in the past and now there is? =/

Well should we post in those threads or shold we avoid posting in infected threads till the spambot message is removed? O_o

1. 111

2. Because doom texted post is normally a half-joke/insult arguably put mildly, and a full doom text would mean the whole a spam anyway since if the post actually had anything that contributes, it wouldn't have been blacked out.

3. If the post is more helpful with the blackout, then why shouldn't it be in doom? I mean, nobody is actually stupid enogh to post in doom a point that could be as effective without the doom, is there?

I prefered DT's simple "Don't do it too often" =D

4. I dunno either lol, but if the post is going to be 10 lines of crap, that's the same as a one-liner and possibly worse. So if the question is about bandwith, spam shouldn't be defined narrowly as one-liners should it? @_@

5. Lmao > Rofl

6. Yeah, it was because Garde couldn't actually ban the spambots (I have no idea how Dimanofff got banned though).

7. I'd like to know that too.

 

1. 111

2. Because doom texted post is normally a half-joke/insult arguably put mildly, and a full doom text would mean the whole a spam anyway since if the post actually had anything that contributes, it wouldn't have been blacked out.

3. If the post is more helpful with the blackout, then why shouldn't it be in doom? I mean, nobody is actually stupid enogh to post in doom a point that could be as effective without the doom, is there?

I prefered DT's simple "Don't do it too often" =D

4. I dunno either lol, but if the post is going to be 10 lines of crap, that's the same as a one-liner and possibly worse. So if the question is about bandwith, spam shouldn't be defined narrowly as one-liners should it? @_@

5. Lmao > Rofl

6. Yeah, it was because Garde couldn't actually ban the spambots (I have no idea how Dimanofff got banned though).

7. I'd like to know that too.

Reply to 2:

Eh... but what if? =P

Some people may just do that out of pure mischief cause they know that they can't be blamed for making a useful post but hidden behind invisible colours. Maybe they may be thinking in their hearts "Ohoh. If anyone should deserve this useful tip, it would be those who actually bother to search here and there and all over and highlight each and every post for possible doom text."

I dunno. As I base this off forum members' characters and personalities, I do not wish to give names as I do not have a specific incident to refer to xD.

Reply to 3:

But you see, the main problem is what is considered often? I mean such vague measurements vary in value from person to person so... >_>

What we (or maybe just me ;-; ) want to know is how to limit it to an agreeable amount to everyone. I mean, someone can doom text 99.99% of the time and claim that "I thought often meant not all the time... D: *innocent puppy-dog eyes plz*" that kind of thing >_>.

However (lol I love to take 2 sides xD) even if we gave them a fixed value, no one would actually bother to keep in mind, calculate, or measure the number of times and the % of times they have been doom texting. So... Wtf? ><

I guess the solution to this problem is to MAKE PEOPLE HAVE FREAKIN COMMON SENSE!!!! DUN DUN DUN DUN. *Epic truth discovered*

 

Reply to 2:

Eh... but what if? =P

Some people may just do that out of pure mischief cause they know that they can't be blamed for making a useful post but hidden behind invisible colours. Maybe they may be thinking in their hearts "Ohoh. If anyone should deserve this useful tip, it would be those who actually bother to search here and there and all over and highlight each and every post for possible doom text."

I dunno. As I base this off forum members' characters and personalities, I do not wish to give names as I do not have a specific incident to refer to xD.

Reply to 3:

But you see, the main problem is what is considered often? I mean such vague measurements vary in value from person to person so... >_>

What we (or maybe just me ;-; ) want to know is how to limit it to an agreeable amount to everyone. I mean, someone can doom text 99.99% of the time and claim that "I thought often meant not all the time... D: *innocent puppy-dog eyes plz*" that kind of thing >_>.

However (lol I love to take 2 sides xD) even if we gave them a fixed value, no one would actually bother to keep in mind, calculate, or measure the number of times and the % of times they have been doom texting. So... Wtf? ><

I guess the solution to this problem is to MAKE PEOPLE HAVE FREAKIN COMMON SENSE!!!! DUN DUN DUN DUN. *Epic truth discovered*

Em... lol, but that part is covered under the coloured text rule. <_<

About the measurement, it's like you stop when the admin tells you to. Or if you don't wanna be told off, don't do it.

heh, I dunno, the rule won't matter all that much anyway coz it just comes to the same thing O-o

 

We need to wait for more people's opinions lol. It looks like we've run out of things to say xD.

 

I have no idea how bandwidth is used up in forums. I thought that the more posts, the more bandwidth used rather than the more characters in a post, the more bandwidth used.

Text takes up very little bandwidth. Images on the other hand...

But then if that were so simple, For the threads started by spam bots, why can't we just delete those threads and ban the bots? >_> Was it because there was no admin free enough to do so in the past and now there is? =/

Bingo!

Well should we post in those threads or shold we avoid posting in infected threads till the spambot message is removed? O_o

It really doesn't matter either way, as long as you are aware that your posts will be deleted with the spambot thread.

 

Flamingrate = Try to keep under 5%
Spamrate = Try to keep under 15%
Colourrate = Try to keep under 25%
Offtopicrate = Try to keep under 35%

One-liners and short posts = Spam, aslong as they are NOT helpful or/and don't contribute anything or/and are just there for shitchat. Saying: "Thank you very much! " Isn't technicially spam, aslong as you don't do it every freaking time. (Meaning like 50%)

Spam = Easier to think of, easier to write, easier to post than longer posts.
Spam = Unneeded, dumb, doesn't contribute anything. If there is too much spam it will be a whole chaos.
Too much spam = Warning or ban. (Depends on how often you do it)

One-liners and short posts who are not spam = Should be avoided. It's not hard, try to make your post more interesting.

Flaming/excessive swearing = Try to avoid as well. Otherwise there MIGHT be a warning/ban. (Depends on the conditions)

Trolling = Ban. No excuses.

Fully coloured/too many colours posts = Warning if you do it too often. (Like in every secound post) If you still don't listen then ban.

Moderating admins or moderators = Warning or ban.
Give a shit about what admins or moderators say = Ban in most cases.

 

I doubt being head and deity of a religion is an exception.

At this time you're trying to troll Kage, not the other way round.

 

Well I feel I have a right to be miffed. This charade has gone on long enough. I WANT SOME CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT!!! HOW THE FUCK DO YOU EXPECT ME TO WRITE A NOVEL IF YOU PEOPLE GET STUCK IN A RUT OF WORSHIPPING SOMEONE WHO HAS NOTHING BETTER TO DO THAN POST IN AN OBSCURE FORUM?! LIGHTEN UP THE FUCKING MOOD!!!

Um... Yeah, what Jacob said. You've been arguing over petty details for long enough. Can we now move on to agreeing on the rules? Or at least switching to a more constructive way to decide on them, for example pros/cons system? Please?

 

Can SP now be able to start creating the rules thread, locking it, then deleting the old rules thread after copying over the rank information? The important thing is to have an "up to date" set of rules that actually apply to this forum as soon as possible. We can always make adjustments later, but we need some rules up there now.

 

Um... Yeah, what Jacob said. You've been arguing over petty details for long enough. Can we now move on to agreeing on the rules? Or at least switching to a more constructive way to decide on them, for example pros/cons system? Please?

Best suggestion for a while, I'd say.

And SP, what about lightening up on those rates for the SL? Jake does have a point, you know.

 

I have a suggestion. Give a one week warning for the bannable offences first. If the person makes the same mistake again within the week, ban.

 

I have a suggestion. Give a one week warning for the bannable offences first. If the person makes the same mistake again within the week, ban.

...

That isn't exactly the problem/confusion right now lol.
implication = READ THE EARLIER PosTS AND DUN BE LAZY -_-"

What the problem really is is that WHAT exactly ARE the bannable offences -_-".

However I think that we've come to a conclusion, so I don't think this is a solution to any existing problems right now lol.

Edit -

Text takes up very little bandwidth. Images on the other hand...

So... what does this prove?

Pics not allowed. Only links to pics. Upload pics somewhere else lol. (Just a suggestion.)

And maybe a lighter set of rules can be put upon the spamrate and all those stuffs in the SL.

Hey... Maybe we should have 2 different sets of rules! One for the Discussion forum and one for the SL. I find the rules for the Discussion section is a bit too strict for the SL =/.

Spam = Unneeded, dumb, doesn't contribute anything. If there is too much spam it will be a whole chaos.

Unless they're funny one-liners ^^" Like witty jokes.

Moderating admins or moderators = Warning or ban.

Now I can't quite agree with that

Well, I mean we aren't actually supposed to MODERATE moderates or admins if the word is used strictly to it's meaning.

However, I do think that admins and moderators aren't perfect either. Admins and Moderators still have flaws in one or more aspects. And with that, I feel that forum members should be free to point out these flaws in them. However, I don't think that they should heavily insult them in doing so. I have an incident to refer to, but I think that that's a really volatile incident and I think everyone here knows what I'm trying to say... ><

Edity -

Give a shit about what admins or moderators say = Ban in most cases.

I think what you meant is...

DON'T give a shit about what admins or moderators say = Ban in most cases.

Oh look. It's a flaw And I don't think that I can get a warning for that can I? I think you should rephrase that earlier point to make yourself more clear

 

Before you go setting the rules in stone, I would like to make a few suggestions.

Firstly, I'd like to make a point about...


























...this. Adding extra lines simply for the sake of making a post longer should not be allowed, for any reason. I admit that this is not a serious problem, but finding the bottom of one of these posts (especially when they span several screen widths) is no fun,

Another thing I want to see less of is finger-pointing. People should worry about their own conduct instead of worrying about other people's. If they want to raise a question about rule-breaking, they should PM the admin instead of moaning about it on the forums. Also people shouldn't take the law into their own hands, saying things like "Don't do that or you will get banned". That's the admin's job, not ours.

The final point I want to make is about one-liners. The problem for me isn't about whether they should be regarded as spam, but how they tend to fill up pages on a thread. You have to remember that by default, only 20 posts are allowed per page, so when people start squeezing one-liners into a thread, it tends to spread the conversation across several pages, making it harder to follow. Don't get me wrong, as long as they're added on the odd occasion and are relevant its fine, but when one-liners are added every other post, it does get quite annoying.

I have a suggestion. Give a one week warning for the bannable offences first. If the person makes the same mistake again within the week, ban.

I don't think there should be a timeout period when it comes to banning people. If they've already been clearly warned prior to making the second offense, they should be banned. No exceptions. Harsh, I know. But if the person doesn't take the hint the first time around, why give them a second chance?

Well thats my two cents. Make what you will of it.

 

Before you go setting the rules in stone, I would like to make a few suggestions.

Firstly, I'd like to make a point about...


























...this. Adding extra lines simply for the sake of making a post longer should not be allowed, for any reason. I admit that this is not a serious problem, but finding the bottom of one of these posts (especially when they span several screen widths) is no fun,

!!!!11!!1!1

*gets caught red-handed*

I did that in Kaeso's mod thread. xD Dun remember? SEARCH FUNCTION >:]

Well I rarely ever see that happening around. The only person I remember doing so, is ME. So... xD K I won't do it again.

Another thing I want to see less of is finger-pointing. People should worry about their own conduct instead of worrying about other people's. If they want to raise a question about rule-breaking, they should PM the admin instead of moaning about it on the forums.

Unless more than 1 person is involved. If more than one person is involved, I feel that the argument should be carried out in a thread to let the other forum members know what it's about and gain a general opinion, which tends to be less biased. You get what I mean.

Or, wait... do you...? ?.?

Also people shouldn't take the law into their own hands, saying things like "Don't do that or you will get banned". That's the admin's job, not ours.

Firstly, us forum members can't say that because we can't ban people! Let alone admins @_@.

I agree with this. However, *insert long lecture here* otherwise, *look at my previous post lol*

The final point I want to make is about one-liners. The problem for me isn't about whether they should be regarded as spam, but how they tend to fill up pages on a thread. You have to remember that by default, only 20 posts are allowed per page, so when people start squeezing one-liners into a thread, it tends to spread the conversation across several pages, making it harder to follow. Don't get me wrong, as long as they're added on the odd occasion and are relevant its fine, but when one-liners are added every other post, it does get quite annoying.

I've set mine to 40. I feel that one-liners are alright so long as it doesn't go out of hand. Funny ones are the best =P.

I don't think there should be a timeout period when it comes to banning people. If they've already been clearly warned prior to making the second offense, they should be banned. No exceptions. Harsh, I know. But if the person doesn't take the hint the first time around, why give them a second chance?

I think we should have a warning system... Maybe... 5 warns max before ban? And if the person doesn't repeat the offence before his or her 5 warns are up for a very long time, a warn can be removed. =P

Well thats my two cents. Make what you will of it.

*Goes to a money changer*

 

Before you go setting the rules in stone, I would like to make a few suggestions.

Firstly, I'd like to make a point about...


























...this. Adding extra lines simply for the sake of making a post longer should not be allowed, for any reason. I admit that this is not a serious problem, but finding the bottom of one of these posts (especially when they span several screen widths) is no fun,

Another thing I want to see less of is finger-pointing. People should worry about their own conduct instead of worrying about other people's. If they want to raise a question about rule-breaking, they should PM the admin instead of moaning about it on the forums. Also people shouldn't take the law into their own hands, saying things like "Don't do that or you will get banned". That's the admin's job, not ours.

I do actually practise some more-than-one line spacing, but sometimes for some purpose. Since I have this tiny bit sense of art and literature and romance(the noun for romantic maybe, it sounds wrong), the spacings do actually separate different and non-related contents, which means those with just one line space or no space would be inferred as closely or somewhat connected.

And I do believe I don't do it that excessively.


And finger-pointing is quite an interesting subject to talk about. We have it everywhere. And in most cases, finger-pointing leads to dissatisfaction and anger and revenge and envy and such.
But strangely you gave an example where it could do good in some way. Well, your friend is doing something wrong and you can't just stay silent, no? Another example, somebody stressed he's going to kill another guy, and you can obviously see he is going to, can you just leave him as he is and think "let the police warn him later"?
Since we're humans, pitifully careless creatures, it is our responsibilty to simply remind each other of faults or possible faults.

But of course, don't tell the mod or ad what to do like "BAN HIM!"



Andwhyisit that this forum seems to easily get filled up with tons of 200 words long posts?

 

Unless more than 1 person is involved. If more than one person is involved, I feel that the argument should be carried out in a thread to let the other forum members know what it's about and gain a general opinion, which tends to be less biased. You get what I mean.

Nope, please PM an admin or PM that person. PMs are for that. Otherwise it just produces discussions: "WHY DO YOU WARN ME ??? I NEVER SPAMMED!!!!1!1"

I've set mine to 40. I feel that one-liners are alright so long as it doesn't go out of hand. Funny ones are the best =P.

No they won't be allowed. It can't be that hard to make five-liners for example instead of one-liners.

I think we should have a warning system... Maybe... 5 warns max before ban? And if the person doesn't repeat the offence before his or her 5 warns are up for a very long time, a warn can be removed. =P

3 warnings before each ban.
A ban means a warning counter reset.
Not breaking the rules means for about 7 days means warning counter -1 while you're not banned.
Not breaking the rules for about 1 month means a ban counter -1 while you're not banned.
Per ban the ban counter increases.
If you break several rules at once you get more warnings for that.
Bigger rule breaking (Trolling, Heavy insulting, Heavy swearing), might get you a ban counter +1 or +2, or even a bigger thing.

1 = 1 Day ban.
2 = 2 Day ban.
...
10 = 10 Day ban.
11 = 2 Week ban.
12 = 3 Week ban.
13 = 1 Month ban.
14 = 2 Month ban.
...
18 = 6 Month ban.
19 = 1 Year ban.
20 = 2 Year ban.

Note that it can't get bigger than 20, unless you are heavily insulting everyone at the forums and do other crazy shit, then you might get a permanent ban.